For Kenvue's Listerine mouthwash, should we emphasize stronger germ-killing formulas or milder options for sensitive users?

Introduction

For Kenvue's Listerine mouthwash, we're facing a critical trade-off between emphasizing stronger germ-killing formulas or milder options for sensitive users. This decision will significantly impact our product positioning, market share, and user satisfaction. I'll analyze this trade-off by examining our product understanding, key metrics, and potential impacts, then design an experiment to inform our decision.

Step 1

Clarifying Questions (3 minutes)

• Context: I'm assuming Listerine is facing increased competition in both the strong and mild mouthwash segments. Could you confirm if this is accurate, and if there are any specific market trends driving this decision?

Why it matters: Helps understand the urgency and market dynamics influencing our strategy. Expected answer: Confirmation of competitive pressure and emerging consumer preferences. Impact on approach: Would influence the weight given to different user segments in our analysis.

• Business Context: Based on our current product mix, I'm thinking Listerine's revenue might be heavily skewed towards stronger formulas. What percentage of our revenue currently comes from stronger vs. milder formulations?

Why it matters: Helps quantify the potential business impact of shifting focus. Expected answer: Roughly 70-80% from stronger formulas, 20-30% from milder options. Impact on approach: Would inform the risk assessment of emphasizing milder options.

• User Impact: I'm assuming we have data on user retention rates for both strong and mild formulas. Can you share any insights on how these differ between the two product types?

Why it matters: Helps understand long-term user value and satisfaction across segments. Expected answer: Higher retention for mild formulas but lower initial adoption rate. Impact on approach: Would influence our strategy for balancing short-term vs. long-term gains.

• Technical: Considering potential formula adjustments, what's our current capability to develop new formulations that balance strength and sensitivity?

Why it matters: Assesses our ability to innovate within this trade-off. Expected answer: R&D team has promising leads but needs 6-12 months for new formulas. Impact on approach: Would affect timeline considerations and potential for a hybrid solution.

• Resource: Given this potential shift in focus, how flexible is our marketing budget to support repositioning or launching new product variants?

Why it matters: Determines our ability to effectively communicate and support any changes. Expected answer: Some flexibility, but significant reallocation would require executive approval. Impact on approach: Would influence the scale and speed of any strategic shifts.